African Primate Reintroduction Workshop 

               

FINAL REPORT  

Apenheul Primate Park 20‐22 April 2006 

Apeldoorn, The Netherlands 

1

African Primate Reintroduction Workshop Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

20-22 April 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1: Executive Summary 3 Section 2: Panel Discussions 13 Fundraising 15 “Case for Support” 18 Section 3: Working Group Reports 19 Chimpanzee and Bonobo 21 Gorilla 32 Drills and Other Monkeys 44 Section 4: Appendices 51 Participants List 53 Participant Introductions 55 Presentations 57 IUCN/SSC RSG Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Reintroductions 58 IUCN/SSC RSG Guidelines for the Placement of Confiscated Animals 90

2

3

African Primate Reintroduction Workshop Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

20-22 April 2006

 

Section 1

Executive Summary

4

5

Executive Summary Introduction African primate sanctuaries are preparing reintroduction programs that could return hundreds of chimpanzees, gorillas, bonobos and other endangered primates to the wild over the next decade. To support this effort, the African Primate Reintroduction Workshop was held April 20-22, 2006, in Apeldoorn, The Netherlands, in order to gather and assess the latest biological, ecological, virological and technical knowledge and to produce an agreed-upon strategy for future efforts. The Pan African Sanctuary Alliance (PASA), which represents primate sanctuaries in 12 African countries, collectively cares for over 700 chimpanzees, 80 gorillas, 45 bonobos, 250 drills, and literally hundreds of other endangered primates. Chimpanzee arrivals have risen by 75 percent since 2000, and all species continue to flow into the sanctuaries at an alarming rate. Unless aggressive measures are taken to restore wild populations, protect wild spaces, and promote conservation awareness and environmental education, it is feared that many of these flagship species will become extinct in situ within the next 25 to 50 years. Several PASA members that have successfully reintroduced primates back into the wild with incredibly high survival rates. But most of those efforts were begun over a decade ago, and much has changed in recent years in terms of technology and ecological and biological trends. PASA recognized that it was time to take a fresh look at reintroduction, from every angle, and the African Primate Reintroduction Workshop brought together 44 international experts from 19 countries who are specialists in the fields of behavioral ecology, social science, primatology, veterinary medicine, reintroduction and virology, among others. The workshop was organized by PASA, in conjunction with the IUCN - World Conservation Union’s Reintroduction Specialist Group and was facilitated by the Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (CBSG). The workshop was hosted by the Apenheul Primate Park with funding from the United Kingdom’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) through the United National Environment Programme (UNEP) / Great Apes Survival Project (GRASP). The Process The Workshop began on 20 April 2006 with welcoming statements from Bert de Boer, director of the Apenheul Primate Park, and from Norm Rosen, chairman of the PASA Advisory Board and Great Ape Coordinator for CBSG. Each participant was then asked to share with the group what they hoped to accomplish over the three days of the workshop and what they wished to contribute. The answers to these questions begin on page 54 of this report. Onnie Byers, Executive Director of CBSG, then presented an introduction to CBSG and the process designed for this workshop. Next, a series of issue-based presentations were given to ensure that everyone was familiar with the key concepts and concerns surrounding primate reintroduction, such as the IUCN Reintroduction Guidelines; disease; community acceptance; animal behavior; site selection; and creating government support, and to bring them up to date on the available scientific information. Speakers included Ben Beck, Dominic Travis, Barb Cartwright, Anne Russon, David Lucas, and Chris Odu Agbor. These presentations can be found on the CD accompanying this report. During the presentations - and the sanctuary presentations that followed - participants were given a form to assist them in capturing key issues and ideas raised

6

by the various speakers so that these concepts could be incorporated into their deliberations. It was suggested that, among other things, they record the following:

• questions posed by speakers to consider in your planning • key concepts, themes, patterns in the messages heard • promising new tools • obstacles to successful planning

Each sanctuary representative was also asked to prepare a presentation for the workshop. They were specifically requested to outline their current reintroduction plans, and to share their success to date, any problems they are facing, and specific questions for the group to consider. Speakers were: Rosa Garriga (Tacugama), Claudine Andre (Lola ya Bonobo), Tony King (PPG-Congo), Liza Gadsby (Drill Ranch), Estelle Raballand (Chimpanzee Conservation Center), Zena Tooze (CERCOPAN) and Felix Lankester (Limbe Wildlife Center and other Cameroon sanctuaries). These presentations, which provoked a great deal of discussion, can also be found on the accompanying CD. Before breaking for dinner, three taxon-based working groups (Chimpanzees/Bonobos; Gorillas; and Drills and other African primates) were formed and instructions given for the first group task -- an issue-generation exercise – that was to begin the following morning. A process of working group sessions, followed by plenary reports and discussion, was used throughout the entire workshop. The issue of finances was raised repeatedly in the plenary presentations, but rather than be distracted by this ubiquitous, if parallel, concern, an evening plenary session was devoted to a discussion on fundraising. This began with a brief panel discussion and then developed into an animated debate focused on how each sanctuary defines itself and its purpose for engaging in a release program. Detailed notes from this discussion can be found in Section 2. The following morning began with the first working group session, which was designed to further define the issues facing each taxonomic group. Members of each group were asked to review the issues identified in presentations and plenary discussions that apply to their taxon focus and to add any that may be missing. Where appropriate, they were to consolidate the issues and then categorize them according to the RSG guidelines including: Planning for Re-introduction (the need, project aims, objectives, and time frame)

A. Habitat & Release Site

B. Species' Socioecology & Behaviour

C. Socioeconomic, Financial, & Legal Requirements

D. Release Stock

E. Genetic Assessment

Disease Transmission & Veterinary Requirements

Transport & Release Implementation

Post-Release Monitoring

The next step was to amplify the issues to ensure they are clear and understandable and to write a one- or two-sentence ‘problem statement’ for each issue. Finally, each group was asked to prioritize their problem statements and prepare a 15-minute presentation for the plenary

7

session. Each group presented its prioritized problem statements and received feedback, which was recorded to be incorporated into their working group report. The second working group task was to generate a list of alternative solutions to each priority problem (referring to information provided in the issue presentations and, if applicable, indicate resources used in identifying potential solutions). Group members reviewed their issue statements and brainstormed potential solutions. Once all ideas were captured, the most promising solutions were identified using sticky dots and a presentation of each group’s prioritized solutions was prepared. On the third day of the workshop, the groups were asked to begin drafting reports that respond to identified issues and include high priority solutions identified in working group session II. Each group was to include a list of specific needs related to each step of the draft plan (i.e. what is needed in terms of information, expertise, financial/human resources, etc to implement the plan?). These draft reports were presented in plenary session. The final task of the workshop was for each working group to prepare a set of action steps necessary for the realization of the solutions they identified to issues facing reintroduced sanctuary primates. They were asked to ensure that each action included the person responsible, the human and financial resources needed, and the time-frame for implementation. These final action plan presentations were made in plenary session. Each issue, proposed solution, and action was projected on the wall so that everyone could read them and they were discussed in detail before being accepted as workshop outputs. Reports from each working group, including detailed solutions and actions, can be found in Section 3 of this document. Just before the workshop closed, an animated exercise was conducted to determine a “case for support” to assist the PASA fundraising effort. Details of this discussion can be found in Section 2). Outcomes Workshop participants used the best available information and the expertise of the dedicated participants in the workshops to develop solutions to assist in planning for and implementing African primate reintroductions. Each working group identified a set of proposed solutions to address the key issues facing the reintroduction of African primates from PASA sanctuaries. All solutions were presented using a computer projector so all participants had an opportunity to offer input into the final reports of each group. The preferred solutions for high-priority issues are listed below (these are not in order of priority). Detailed actions can be found in the individual working group reports in Section 3. Overall Workshop Recommendations

1. PASA must establish an active and accessible Scientific Advisory Board to consult on sanctuary- wide issues. This Scientific Advisory Board will include a Reintroduction Expert Team that will advise project managers on all aspects of reintroduction. (This recommendation was echoed by all three working groups, but was initially brought forward and further elaborated on by the Drills and Other Monkeys Working Group; see page 43 for details.) Note: Advisors present at the workshop committed to serve as advisors in the future. They will assist in any way possible to support the sanctuary managers.

8

2. PASA should convene a workshop focused on telemetry technology to find, and possibly create, the right tool for monitoring released African primates. PASA should establish a committee to develop specific pre-release goals, training procedures, and release criteria. (This recommendation was echoed by all three working groups but was initially brought forward and further elaborated on by the Chimpanzee and Bonobo Working Group; see page 31 for details.)

Chimpanzee / Bonobo Working Group 1. Surveys are required for any potential release site. While it is acknowledged that there is a need to survey (e.g. biodiversity of flora and fauna) as part of the evaluation of potential release sites, few sanctuaries have the expertise or resources to carry out these surveys or to interpret the results. There is also a need for national surveys of wild chimpanzee populations to be conducted in order to aid the sanctuaries in their release plans (if and when necessary). Solutions Form a working group within PASA similar to the already established veterinary group to assist those sanctuaries wishing to carry out release programs. Each sanctuary considering release must compile all known data on the proposed sites including whether or not there are existing chimpanzee populations and if so their density and range. Minimum requirements are that sanctuaries considering releases must follow HELP Congo’s process. The PASA release program support team will help with these surveys. 2. There is a need for assurances of continued active and legal protection of the release site. Solution Identify what type of legal protected status (e.g. national park, nature reserve, wildlife sanctuary) can be given to the release site and/or the sanctuary as it reflects different country policies. 3. There is a need for local cooperation between sanctuaries, local and international NGOs so that joint strategic plans and effective sharing of resources and expertise can be carried out to ensure collective endorsements of each project Solution Where there are other relevant stakeholders, a countrywide action plan needs to be written to ensure credibility. In addition, The PASA release programme support team should analyze the methodology of the release project, in order to generate an official endorsement by that committee, which can be used for funding materials and for the international community to increase credibility. 4. There is a need to ensure continued long-term monitoring and clarification on length. Solution PASA must organize a workshop focused on telemetry to find, and possibly create, the right tool and procedure for monitoring. PASA should establish a committee that will work with medical and behavioural specialists to develop specific pre-release goals, training procedures, and release criteria. This committee should work in collaboration with wild chimpanzee specialists and experienced rehabilitation project representatives to develop appropriate goals and training methods.

9

5. There is a need to consider viable population size and the carrying capacity of proposed sites when considering releases. Solution PASA should compile information on typical chimpanzee densities in different types/qualities of habitat and each sanctuary should assess whether the potential release site is currently under-populated (below capacity, for chimpanzees / bonobos), based on its habitat type/quality plus local threats to chimpanzees and the habitat. In addition the sanctuary considering a release program should assess future threats to the potential release site that could affect the site’s future capacity to support chimpanzees / bonobos and then estimate how many chimpanzees / bonobos can be added on the basis of the above assessment. All this information should be documented and reported to the PASA technical support committee. 6. There is a need for long-term, salaried veterinary personnel to enforce practical and suitable health protocols needed for day-to-day operations as well as for health assessment, management and disease risk assessments for sanctuary release programmes. Solution Identify and assess the current veterinary personnel for each of the sanctuaries/release sites that are proposing releasing primates in the future or are continuing post-release monitoring, and investigate veterinary specific funding options to meet the identified needs.

Gorilla Working Group 1. Habitat and Release site: What is necessary to identify an appropriate release site for gorillas and how long does it take to locate a suitable site? Solution Look at/be aware of international statements, as well as national development and land use plans, and then develop common methodology for site surveys and share with sanctuaries. 2. Post-release monitoring - There is difficulty in tracking gorillas after release due to the fact that they cannot be followed into the forest. Solution Make this a PASA-level research issue and encourage universities to look at this issue of telemetry with gorillas. Alternatively, the Iowa Great Ape Trust may be interested in this issue and may be willing to assist in such a research project. PASA must access expert advice on telemetry to present to sanctuaries (perhaps to invite to IPS conference to give presentation). 3. Reintroduction programs must plan for and address potential conflict with humans. Telemetry can be useful for mitigation of animal human conflict also. Solution Research/identify what kind of buffer zone or physical barrier might work with gorillas (such as feces and chili powder for elephants, fences, etc). 4. There is a need to consider and develop long-term management plans for the reintroduced populations.

10

Solution Need to create a flexible plan before release that takes into account changing - or different - long-term goals and different long-term scenarios. Behavioural and psychological assessments should be done. 5. Release Stock and Genetic Assessment - There is a need to ensure that the released gorillas are the appropriate taxon for the release area as well as genetic testing to address population viability given the lower numbers of individual gorillas reintroduced. Solution PASA to assist PPG in determining the cost of genetic testing of its population, and to develop a protocol for data collection, analysis and use so that it can present a proposal to John Aspinall Foundation (JAF). 6. Projects need to be managed when there are differing government agendas for the reintroduction, particularly around the issue of tourism. Solution Prepare a funding proposal for an analysis of whether tourism will work at PPG and elsewhere. 7. It is essential that the needs of local community are addressed and that there is local support for the project. Solution Work with local NGOs, so that socio-economic benefits don’t come directly from foreigners. Also, sanctuary staff may not be the best people to manage certain community projects. Try to build stronger ties to development NGOs, humanitarian NGOs if they are present. 8. Species socio-ecology and behaviour – It is difficult for sanctuaries in Africa to obtain all the information available that is necessary to assist in planning for reintroduction. Solution There is a clear role for PASA to keep a database of literature and summaries. Perhaps a PASA volunteer can be identified to pull together a bibliography of published information for the various species and keep it updated every year. Note: Ben Beck committed to develop a reintroduction bibliography and get it to PASA members within one month. 9. Lessons learned in other sanctuary release programs are not widely available in written form and sanctuaries lack a mechanism to share this type of information. Solution Develop a PASA database of lessons learned in various reintroductions. Perhaps a PASA volunteer/staff member could visit all of the sanctuaries, conduct interviews and summarize and write it up for PASA (or perhaps wider) distribution. Drills and Other Monkeys Working Group 1. Clarification of goals/purpose/priorities Each reintroduction project needs a clear statement of purpose, thereby improving the ability to address, justify and formulate many other aspects and achieve expected results.

11

Solutions Outside advisors to review the RPP to offer clarity. These advisors must resonate with PASA goals, and be accessible, impartial, thick-skinned. Creation of a Reintroduction Expert Team that would advise project managers on aspects of reintroduction. Expert team members, supported by the organizations in which they sit, to contribute in this capacity. Re-introduction proposals/plans will be circulated to experts for comment prior to possible site visits. 2. Post-release monitoring (telemetry / data collection) Reintroduction projects currently lack efficient and effective methods and technology including telemetry, to collect post-release data on animal identification, location and mortality. The projects require an expert, non-competitive and accessible source to provide solutions. Solutions

• Reintroduction Expert Team to provide a list of companies and contacts developing this technology.

• Compile a list of available options, and the strengths and weaknesses of their applications including who has used what technology, and with what species.

• Determine resources available – biodiversity monitoring etc.

12

13

African Primate Reintroduction Workshop Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

20-22 April 2006

 

Section 2

Panel Discussions

14

15

Panel Discussions Fundraising Discussion Zena Tooze provided a short introduction to the panel discussion regarding the obstacles to ensure funding for release/reintroduction projects: the primary obstacle of being perceived as a sanctuary and as a sanctuary battling that image. The plan is to create a different spin and expand the work of how sanctuaries are perceived. Documentation of what is done is very important, attracting students to help with that work (i.e. data collection, analysis and statistics for publication), and to increase credibility of what sanctuaries do. This is also important to develop community programmes and partnerships to join together for extended capacity building. It was made clear though this discussion that while conservation is the focus for many in the room, the welfare issue angle is attractive to some donors. The Golden Lion Tamarin project serves as a key example of what can be achieved with an extensive scientific approach. The project has raised millions from different donors and established long term relationships with them. Of particular importance to this success has been:

• Clear and measurable project goals • The reintroduction project was part of a multi disciplinary team: behavioural ecology,

habitat restoration, conservation effort, veterinary sciences etc. • Accountability: every year information was collected and put on a website; every

individual was marked and all animals accounted for and documented • Invited peer review – the project approached critics and invited them to pick the

project apart, the foundation for a relationship was built and conflict averted • Had Smithsonian cachet – was not “just” a sanctuary and they had a huge institution

behind them • Brazilian-ized the process – non-locals had to get out of roles of authority and

Brazilians needed to be in place and empowered • Courted Brazilian government from the very beginning: offered ownership of the

entire captive population (147 zoos) to Brazilian state. The project developed an incredible tolerance for red tape and vehicle breakdown and donors are no longer funding because it is a success story – so far the Golden Lion Tamarin only primate that has been down-listed. So, we have done a good job and have to let go! The basic principals of fundraising are common sense. Everyone must have a “case for support”, you are not just fundraising for yourself but against every other cause that’s out there, therefore your case must be very strong. People give to people, trust and critical relationships must be built, use the people within your organization to get through to someone. Many donors get inundated with proposals for funding and if you know anyone to get an ‘in’ you’re more likely to get noticed and considered for funding. One concern is that first time funding seekers get only small amounts to see what will do with the money, which would have a meaningful outcome to prove your cause and then possibly get a larger amount next time. It is important to build confidence and relationships before you can attract bigger funding. This is unlucky because sometimes these projects need large amounts from the very beginning. One option is making a pyramid of gifts and take advantage of having several donors to choose from. Identify where you need the financial assistance, start thinking

16

of the critical issues that addresses each donors specific requests. In order to do this you must know what are the right elements are that the donors are looking for in particular projects. If you are missing the essential ideas and outcomes you have a much less chance of getting the money. Processes that donors often use include sending out three scientific reviewers who address particular issues and how applied science becomes conservation and reviewers comment on the use of conservation. One question commonly asked is that do people really understand what that the use of conservation really is; they need evidence that you are actually doing conservation. They also need to know that you have done your homework, you have explored other research has been done and demonstrate that you know the field. Proposals are reviewed to understand how sound the research is, how sound is the vision, how sound are the goals and who did it? Accountability is the key, clear, finite, visionary and do not try to do everything yourself, but still be able to try to get the help you need. No one can be an expert in all things but if you cannot get the work done properly, you will need to be able to convince donors that you will do a good job and use available specialists in each aspect of the reintroduction process. It’s necessary to build the case and you cannot make a case for “sanctuaries and reintroduction” with the information at hand, the topic is not cohesive at this point. Make the goals clear on what you want to do, if PASA can be helpful in setting up teams of specialists that may be a way forward. An area where help is very urgently needed is in writing grant proposals. This is a huge task but it is a top priority for all sanctuaries. In many ways this process is similar to when PASA was formed five years ago. Sanctuary managers had to overcome several barriers in order to form such an alliance. Again, there is a need to think in a unified way, and given that most of the funds have to be raised, and the awareness has to develop circles around the same issues, there must be a unified way to move forward. We need to create a common mission statement in order for re-introduction to move forward. All sanctuary managers need to be on the same page, we need to find commonality, and there is no guarantee the projects will go forward. Otherwise the amount of re-introduction projects will double the present work load, therefore we need a unified front. It seems necessary that we should schedule a time to go over any common ground and develop a case for support, not a mission statement. We need a valid conservation plan that is valid with impeccable credentials. This would strengthen the project as well as give a much better plausible case for money. Overall, the case for why this is important and why money should be given is important as you research each donor and tailor proposals to match what you know about each donor their specific criteria. One option may be to build some kind of template that everyone could plug their information into individually. There are some small scientific questions that need to be answered and can be funded; some of these small questions can be answered by students who already have funding. Maybe it is time to have better information published, and form a journal of our own that could publish reports and such that current journals would not publish. From the sanctuary perspective, time is a very critical issue. It is difficult to find extra time in the day to day work to organize research, data collection and prepare for publishing. Funding core work is the problem; feeding, salaries, etc., those problems need to be addressed as soon as possible. It is difficult to understand for sanctuaries why donors are reluctant to give money for those basic needs? Those needs have to be brought up often.

17

The outcome of this workshop is important for the potential level of support to sanctuaries. If credible work is not done it will be very harmful to everyone, and although some of the projects described in the sanctuary presentations have a strong conservation profile, several of the presentations were using the terms reintroduction and conservation. This seems to be encouraged by welfare concerns and solving internal capacity problems, which are very valid issues, but it is important to use the right terminology related to IUCN/RSG Guidelines as this reference is used all the time. There is a real potential for sanctuaries to get involved in actual conservation supplementation efforts in many areas but this has to be done in a very thorough and methodological way with expert guidance to adhere as closely to RSG guidelines as possible. Even in cases where governments are pushing for release the process cannot be hurried. In some cases (e.g. Uganda), release of sanctuary apes may never become a reality because of provenance issues. Sanctuaries need to get priorities straight and live up to the mission statement, even in reintroduction. The conservation of the species or the welfare of the individuals must remain first and foremost. Another important issue to focus on and pursue is capacity building, and making sure that African nationals are involved at all levels. Succession plans must be in place to here must be in place for sanctuaries to be viable long term. The sanctuary presentations were not prepared as fundraising tools but as presentations to peers. Nevertheless, the outside experts at this meeting need to act as the voice of the outside world, offering help and support to the sanctuaries in a difficult situation, but part of this is also to offer critique plans in action. There is no room for failure; many people are really focused on PASA and it is crucial that every resource is brought in to make the next project successful. We’d like this plan to be constructive and that’s the reason we took it to people, to get more information and suggestions. At this stage of the workshop, there was significant concern among the sanctuary managers that their presentations and opinions are not been captured positively. However, the purpose of this workshop is to help sanctuaries make a plan for success, identify problems, and possible solutions. During the next two days we need to identify the things needed and come up with a level of support from PASA. We also need to start identifying what sanctuaries need based on their presentations.

18

“Case for Support” Discussion During the Fundraising Panel Discussion the need for a separate session on creating a “mission statement” or “case for support” related to PASA Sanctuary release efforts was identified. It is necessary with a mission statement or statement of purpose for using reintroduction as a way forward for some sanctuaries. This session was chaired by Neil Maddison and Doug Cress. Initially, the group went through a brainstorming exercise identifying key reasons for why it is important to release sanctuary primates back into the wild, these include:

• Apes are very special animals • We care for the individuals • They are our closest living non-human relative, we risk losing our heritage • We can save populations of great apes; trying to save a species through

reintroduction • There is an urgent welfare issue • We need to right the wrong • It will help the preservation of biodiversity; environmental and habitat protection of

the ecosystem • If the primates disappear so will other species; humans will have problems as well • It will help local communities dependent upon the forest • Loss of primates means sources of well-being for humans will diminish • Forests are important, primates are gardeners of the forest • Preserving biodiversity for future generations, trying to fix what mankind has broken

There is a problem with orphan apes and other non-human primates and, as a result of this, problem sanctuaries were born. The reason orphan apes are placed in sanctuaries is because of government, NGOs, and corporations. It is because of humans that they arrived in sanctuaries and it is our job to put them back. Sanctuaries are becoming increasingly overcrowded and the next step is to put them back where they came from. How can we accomplish this? It is necessary to create links between people, the apes, and the environment. One suggestion is to enhance law enforcement. Also, a shift of economics as money used to keep them in captivity can be used for keeping them wild. Specifically, we need to tailor each request to the individual or organization you are approaching. We must also be careful not to lose zoo support if we are righting a wrong in terms of apes in captivity. There is a need to size up the customer or donors because different donors respond to certain things. It’s best to look at it from a holistic point of view. Not just the person giving the money, but the area in which the project will be completed. It’s good to appeal to a socially conscience donor. It’s the idea of wanting to help children in an orphanage, because it is the right thing to do. Ethical issues are also critical. Apes have an intelligence similar to a child. If you knew thousands of children were being killed, as a human you would do something about it. Passion is missing, and humans cannot conceive of a future without primates in the forest Slogan: Sanctuaries: Put us out of business Solution: Reintroduction by PASA sanctuaries

19

African Primate Reintroduction Workshop Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

20-22 April 2006

 

Section 3

Working Group Reports

20

21

Working Group Reports CHIMPANZEE/BONOBO WORKING GROUP Participants: Marc Ancrenaz, Claudine André, Wayne Boardman, Frands Carlsen (facilitator), Raffaella Commitante (documenter), Debby Cox (presenter), Joanne Earnhardt, Rosa Garriga, Benoit Goosens, Alliete Jamart, Felix Lankester, Fred Launay, Estelle Raballand, Anne Russon, Richard Sussna, Caroline Tutin, Steve Unwin The Chimpanzee/Bonobo group had representatives from six sanctuaries. All sanctuary representatives were initially asked to clarify the issues applying to their specific situation in relation to the presentations on day one: Limbe Wildlife Center, Cameroon LWC is a small facility with no possibility of expansion. Presently chimpanzees are arriving at the centre at a rate of 7-8 per year. Release issues: funds for such a programme are lacking and the manpower needed is scarce. Release sites are as yet unidentified and there is a lack of expertise on identifying a proper site for release. Currently, there’s no suitability of release animals protocol, overview of psychological preparedness or individual subspecies identification (help needed with genetic sequencing) and – subspecies are dispersed throughout 3 facilities. Need for proper health screening for incoming – outgoing chimpanzees, wild population as well as human workers – consensus on what diseases need to be screened for. Needed expertise to determine how a viable population is achieved in terms of adding individuals to groups to maintain proper population management and what is a proper habitat size. Infrastructure needs: fencing, vehicles etc., - gaining proper governmental and legal requirements for release – research on socio-economic impact for local people – lack of expertise in developing a post release monitoring system. Jane Goodall Institute, Uganda Issue here is more related to translocation of wild specimens than to release of sanctuary chimpanzees. Present sanctuary chimpanzees should not be reintroduced in Uganda because they did not originate from Uganda. We need a template for the development of a multi-disciplinary team. Small fragmented populations face extinction and they should be allowed to die out or moved to new locations. A proper survey needed for new areas regarding carrying capacity. For logistics, they need to move one group at a time and allow time or move several groups at one time. Also, what should the protocol be for movements of these isolated groups, what are behaviour projections for contact between these groups? How long does monitoring last? 5 – 10 years? What is appropriate long term monitoring time? What diseases should be taken into consideration regarding this movement? What are genetic implications of mixing groups, and funding issues for such a project? CSWCT, Uganda If release it an option at all, there is a need for expertise at all release stages. Release site availability and identification of suitable habitat, political issues and ownership issues between Congo and Uganda (both P. schweinfurthii) provenance as well. Integration/behavioural issues between sanctuary groups: what is the protocol to be followed for group size and integration regarding release? Human encroachment in possible release sites (local community settlements), expertise on flora and fauna identification in possible release sites, funding, government support, protection of release habitat, etc.

22

Tacugama, Sierra Leone National survey needed to see what is out there regarding chimpanzee populations, forest status, potential release sites, etc. to determine if release is an option. Expertise and funds to undertake this are urgently needed! The current conditions in Sierra Leone are prime for such an effort right now as guns are banned. We need to institute a strong conservation programme which would reinforce the government’s decision and maintain such a ban. We urgently need funds to pay salary for essential personnel. Lola Ya Bonobo, DRC Most preparations have already been done and we still lack results of site survey and feasibility study. There’s a lot of political instability in the country, which is a serious obstacle to move forward and there are armed insurgents lingering in area. We need to meet the demands of partner, which include settling the political and armed soldiers issue, a reinforcement of local population. Also, there is a need to help prepare a final proposal to donors regarding the reinforcement plan. Official designation of the site as a bonobo flora and fauna protected area from the government is in the works, but not ready yet. Chimpanzee Conservation Centre, Guinea Over-crowding is an important issue. There is a huge problem with chimpanzee orphans in Guinea. Protection of the release site now and in the future regarding funding and manpower, stretching of resources (money and personnel) from trying to do too much as project expands to cover more and more issues. Risk assessment regarding success projection of release project needs written official endorsement from an international organization and scientific support (from PASA?) to begin reintroduction to show funding bodies (already has local endorsement). We need lab facilities and availability; pre-release behavioural survey on chimpanzees to evaluate for individual suitability to identify possible candidates for release; post release behavioural survey, disease risk evaluation, suitable and practical vet protocol for release candidates. Population projection scenario of released chimpanzees is also needed, as is the future of fragmented habitat as used in release programmes. We also need help in writing up and presenting a proposal that will generate funds. A biodiversity survey in the release area so chimpanzees would be flagship species for that site. There’s a lack of NGO support in the area as well as international NGO support, especially a lack of capacity in our own NGO to handle funding and logistical issues HELP - Congo Orphan issue: too many chimpanzees too many gorillas in Congo. JGI approached HELP to assist in release of chimpanzees. They need a guarantee from JGI regarding long-term funding and protection in place to affect all needed stages of reintroduction process. There’s a lack of communication between sanctuaries in the same country regarding the number of animals coming into sanctuaries and how sanctuaries can work together with the same objectives. In order to keep a united front for dealing with the government, combining resources and expertise, and also coming up with a strategic plan for the Congo to unite the sanctuaries and all their resources would be beneficial. We also need a long-term veterinary presence, especially for the release site (funding for same). Also, funding to continue the long term monitoring programme already in place, and the need for long term personnel to manage camps and salary for them. If new release is to go forward all support personnel and funding for them and the project is necessary.

23

Overall issues: • Pre-release evaluation criteria and training of candidates • Captive management of non-released animals • Disease risk for incoming and strict protocols to lessen disease risk • Reintroduction begins with the arrival of an animal • Cost/benefit analysis of resources and establishing changing needs of sanctuaries

as they become also reintroduction centers. • Sanctuaries need to have continuing impact on stopping the flow of orphans

(bushmeat initiatives etc.) • Human safety issues regarding released chimpanzees and local human population

RELEASE PLANNING Whilst it is important to explore the possibilities of rehabilitating sanctuary chimpanzees and bonobos, the group agreed that a core issue is the continued influx of orphans into the sanctuaries and that a maximum effort must be made to stem this influx at the root cause level. The group identified the following solutions and actions to counter this: Solution Public Awareness Campaigns at a regional level Action PASA to network/initiate a coordinated effort with relevant stakeholders in the region to develop a public awareness campaign in the critical habitat countries with PASA operations (DRC; Congo; Cameroon; Guinea; Nigeria; Sierra Leone). The PASA Education Workshop to concentrate the next 2-3 yrs on this strategy as opposed to sanctuary level education programmes. PASA contact Bushmeat Crisis Taskforce (BCTF); GRASP/UN; WILD AID to help in this programme. Solution Solution Develop a law enforcement Strategy at a Regional Level: Action PASA to network/initiate a coordinated effort with relevant stakeholders in the region to develop a strategy to assist National Governments and their agencies in improving their ability to carry out effective law enforcement. This includes legal status as well as physical enforcement. This efforts need to be coordinated with others who have implementing part of this already (i.e. CI/WWF/ GRASP/ Steve Wise, Wild Aid) A. Habitat and Release site: High Priority Issues 1. While it is acknowledged that there is a need to survey (e.g. biodiversity of flora and fauna) as part of the evaluation of potential release sites, few sanctuaries have the expertise or resources to carry out these surveys or to interpret the results. There are also limited sites suitable for release and criteria for selection of secondary sites also needs to be developed. 2. There is a need for national surveys of wild chimpanzee populations to be conducted in order to aid the sanctuaries in their release plans (if and when necessary).

24

Solution Form a working group within PASA similar to our veterinary group to assist those sanctuaries wishing to carry out release programmes. Action Marc Ancrenaz and Debby Cox to co-chair this working group. Will include others outside of PASA. PASA through this working group will contact and work closely with the GRASP/ IUCN Primate Specialist Group working group for surveys of Great Apes. Sierra Leone considered critical, so this group will work closely with Bala Amarasekaran and Rosa Garriga of Tacugama Sanctuary to get a nation wide survey started within 12 months. Debby-JGI will help in grant writing; Marc in methods; will approach WB who is already doing surveys to include all forests. Each sanctuary considering release to compile all known data on the proposed sites: Botanical/wildlife/socioeconomic/threats. Then look for the gaps. Need to know if there are existing chimpanzee populations/density/range. Minimum requirements are that sanctuaries considering releases must follow HELP Congo’s process. PASA support team with help with these surveys. Other Issues identified 3. Currently there are no standardized criteria or template to determine whether release sites are suitable or not. 4. Sanctuaries lack the capacity for a multi-disciplinary team to assist in the release process. 5. There needs to be clarity on whether the sanctuaries are attempting reinforcing or supplementing wild populations or conservation reintroduction, welfare release or translocations. When reinforcing, releasing or translocating, consideration needs to be taken for the welfare of the group or individual being released due to the territorial behaviour of the existing chimpanzee population.

6. Is fragmented habitat suitable for potential release sites? Could the presence of released chimpanzees in the fragments preserve the habitat?

B. Species Socio-ecology and Behaviour Regarding the definition of this category in the RSG Guidelines:

• In conjunction with habitat assessment, review or gather socioecological and behavioural data on the taxon of concern. To determine the critical needs of the taxon of concern, the status, ecology, and behaviour of wild populations must be considered. For primates, such data might include habitat preferences, intraspecific variation, adaptations to local ecological conditions, social behaviour and system, emigration/immigration patterns, group composition, carrying capacity, density, home range, shelter and food requirements, foraging and feeding behaviour, predators, and diseases. Also, population studies that reveal rate of increase, sex ratio, and ratio of young in a population provide baseline data to help measure project success. Overall, a good knowledge of the natural history of the taxon is important to the entire re-introduction scheme.

• If socioecological and behavioural data are not available, studies to obtain this information should be carried out prior to re-introduction. If current wild populations are extinct, too few, or too shy to be sufficiently studied, information on the natural history of extant subspecies or other related wild taxa may be employed. Information on captive animals of the taxon

25

concerned should be applied only as supplementary data. In such cases, consultation with experts is necessary to determine the minimum amount of natural history data needed.

• Re-introduction projects must consider the humane treatment of animals. There should be a reasonable assessment of the survival prospects of the release animals to justify the risks involved. Specifically, survival prospects for released primates should at least approximate those of wild animals of the same sex and age. When survival is a major concern, a soft release is considered more appropriate.

The group agreed that there is already an abundance of data available concerning these issues and decided that this was not an area of high priority for this workshop C. Socio-economic, Legal requirements & financial, Cooperation amongst NGO’s, donor communities, sanctuaries High Priority Issues 1. There is a need for assurances of continued active and legal protection of the release site. Solution Identify what type of legal protected status (e.g. National park, nature reserve, wildlife sanctuary) can be given to the release site and/or the sanctuary as it reflects different country policies. Action Set up a meeting with the local government representative to identify the status – this should be done by each sanctuary manager. 2. There is a need for local cooperation between sanctuaries, local and international NGOs so that joint strategic plans and effective sharing of resources and expertise can be carried out to ensure collective endorsements of each project Solution Where there are other relevant stakeholders, a countrywide action plan needs to be written to ensure credibility. Action Each sanctuary considering release needs to initiate and formulate action plans for the country (Debby Cox will provide Uganda’s action plan as a template) Solution An expert committee for release projects, chosen by the PASA members and the sanctuary, to analyze the methodology of their release project, in order to generate an official endorsement by that committee, which can be used for funding materials and for the international community to increase credibility. Action Create the committee, PASA to oversee committee members 3. There is a need for sanctuaries to ensure that there is two-way communication between the sanctuary and the government, which could include supporting government conservation efforts.

26

Solution Sanctuaries must be involved in lobbying efforts for conservation issues. Action Each sanctuary considering releases must develop a counterpart or relevant contact or point person in the government who will then become the key contact person (where appropriate). 4. There is a need for funding to ensure continued long term monitoring and clarification on length. This should include funding for permanent veterinarian, and other key staff (i.e. managers) Solution PASA must organize a workshop about telemetry, and come up with ideas – Workshop plans are in the works – perhaps the technicians representing telemetry companies can help in funding workshop as it helps test their equipment – we need to find and possibly create the right tool for monitoring.

Action Debby Cox will contact telemetry companies and invite them to come to IPS as exhibitors, she needs to be given contact names.

Contact the telemetry companies and their engineers to sit down with sanctuary managers to try to develop the best product for primate use. Consider other technologies available and develop a relationship with the companies (e.g. GSM technology) There needs to be technical involvement to develop the best product – perhaps initiate a contract or partnership to develop and test equipment – Benoit Goosens will act as PASA key person.

Other Issues identified 5. There is a need for pre- and post-release studies on the impact on neighboring human communities in potential release sites. 6. If a release site is identified, the legal status of the site selected needs to be known and possibly improved upon.

7. There needs to be clarification in writing on what is the legal ownership status of the chimpanzees selected for release. In most cases, ownership is governmental, not NGO driven. 8. There needs to be clarification on the protected status of the chimpanzees and their habitat and improved upon.

9. There is need for cost/benefit analysis of the release option with regards to expected outcomes.

10. There is a lack of skills at the sanctuary level in effectively completing funding proposals.

11. There is a need to access the risk of releasing chimpanzees in countries that are still politically unstable and/or rebel activity is present. D. Release Stock

27

High Priority Issues 1. There is a need for a standard and accepted pre-release evaluation of individual suitability for release, as well as an identification of protocols for release candidates. Solution PASA should strike a committee that will work with medical and behavioural specialists to develop specific pre-release goals, training procedures, and release criteria. Pre-release goals include forest competency (e.g., foraging, ranging, nesting, social skills), appropriate relationships with humans, and good health. Committee should work in collaboration with wild chimpanzee specialists and experienced rehabilitation project representatives to develop appropriate goals and training methods

Within sanctuaries: A. Identify individuals who are unsuitable for release B. For individuals who are potentially releasable, develop goals and training programs for

release preparation, then implement the program. C. Hold regular team meetings to assess individual progress and plan appropriate corrective

measures (up to and including reassessing as not releasable) D. Develop criteria for release readiness, in collaboration with wild chimpanzee specialists and

experienced rehabilitation projects. Assess candidates for release on an individual basis, in terms of whether each meets all the criteria considered essential to release. Also assess any limitations and weigh strengths and weaknesses before deciding on release.

E. This work requires project staff (full time) that are trained in behavioural management plus specialist consultants

HELP Congo and representatives from orangutan rehabilitation projects may provide useful suggestions.

Action Aliette Jamart will chair this committee. Other committee members will be Kay Farmer, Caroline Tutin, Anne Russon and Estelle Raballand 2. There is a need to consider viable population size and carrying capacity when considering releases. Solution

• PASA should compile information on typical chimpanzee densities in different types-qualities of habitat

• Sanctuary should assess reasons to consider that the potential release site is currently under-populated (below capacity, for chimpanzees), based on its habitat type-quality plus local threats to chimpanzees (e.g., hunting, illness) and the habitat (e.g., logging, agriculture).

• Sanctuary should assess future threats to the potential release site (e.g., plans for development, illegal activities) that could affect the sites future capacity to support chimpanzees

• Estimate how many chimpanzees can be added on the basis of the above assessment

• document and report to PASA technical support committee

28

Action Debby Cox has information re first bullet point and will make it available to the technical support committee to oversee or assist.

3. There is a need for training and resources to carry out long term pre- and post- behavioural studies on individuals going into the release programme in order to analyze release preparedness. Solution Pre-release: See number 1 solutions Post release: a. establish benchmarks for progress b. field team identifies potential problems on the basis of their post-release monitoring c. hold routine team meetings (behavior, medical, management, field staff) to discuss problem

cases and decide on necessary action d. develop appropriate monitoring to assess progress based on actions taken e. document all problems, actions taken, and results

Other issues identified 4. There is a need to consider what is a viable population size with regards to release as well as ensuring not to exceed normal population densities for the available habitat.

5. There is a potential need to consider cultural differences between populations or communities when releasing into an area where there is a wild population (whenever possible), as you may be introducing foreign potentially negative behaviour into the existing group.

E. Genetic Assessment 1. There is a need for population projections and modeling (on the genetic level) both in the case of release and reinforcement projects. Solution a. Collect and store samples for genetic identification on arrival (e.g., blood, hair); consult with

genetic experts on what to collect and on proper collection and storage procedures. PASA needs to identify a lab that can do genetic analyses and that is willing to collaborate and interpret results (e.g., forensic lab)

b. Evaluate potential contribution of new genetic material to the resident wild population c. Determine genetic relationships of individuals released d. Collect information on relatedness among ex-captives post release (e.g., offspring

parentage) e. Make special note of reproduction between wild and ex-captive individuals

Action Benoit Goosens to head efforts.

29

2. There is a need for guidelines on release of individuals with regards to provenance and subspecies consolidation, in particular for individuals that may have crossed man-made borders. Who does PASA go to as the authority on genetic status re subspecies? Solution a. Aim for conservative strategies, never to mix subspecies; find key person; b. Following data collection as for 1(a), consult with species specialists on appropriate

disposition of these individuals

Action Contact Scientific Commission for GRASP – Benoit Goosens to head efforts F. Disease transmission & Veterinary requirements Before problems and solutions can be addressed, the following is assumed: All sanctuaries that participate in release programmes will adhere to the health guidelines. All sanctuaries must reach a minimum standard in health care. We need to consider the implementation of an audit/evaluation process (sanctuary level/ PASA level/ self assessment) to ensure effectiveness of health programmes (one possibly useful system exists – Geraldine Dodge Foundation) Action Steve Unwin to disseminate system information. High Priority issues: 1a. There is a need for long-term and salaried veterinary personnel to enforce practical and suitable health protocols needed for day-to-day operations. Solution Identify and assess the current veterinary personnel for each of the sanctuaries/release sites that are proposing releasing primates in the future or are continuing the post release monitoring.

Actions Sanctuary managers, veterinary advisors etc. to review 2006 vet workshop information to assess what veterinary input is required by each sanctuary or region, (e.g. Cameroonian sanctuaries).

Sanctuary managers must include salaried veterinary personnel in their core operating budget.

1b. Personnel Training: Skills of the veterinary personnel within the sanctuaries need to be assessed so that training requirements (e.g. grant writing to diagnostic techniques) can be established. Need to develop a means of assessing health personnel first. Identify what training options are currently available internally or internationally. Action Currently under construction (PASA Vet List Serve)

30

1c. Funding: Solution Identify potential funding sources

Action To investigate veterinary specific funding options (e.g. how sanctuaries and field programmes currently get their vets (e.g. MGVP, WCS field vets etc.) Grants opportunities (e.g. Darwin Initiative and other grants/ veterinary organisations etc). Steve Unwin/ Wayne Boardman to head efforts. 2. There is a need develop health programmes which include health assessment, management and disease risk controls for both chimpanzees and bonobos (captive and wild) and human populations (workers, local communities). Solution Develop a method for health assessment, management and disease risk controls for sanctuary release programmes

Action PASA veterinary advisory board/ current PASA vets/ external expertise (e.g. Marc Ancranaz, Dominic Travis (Steve Unwin to coordinate). Review IUCN Great Ape Reintroduction Guidelines (in press), the current IUCN Non-human Primate Reintroduction Guidelines, the current PASA Veterinary Health Care Manual, and the current PASA health protocols (including human and primates, in 2006 vet healthcare workshop report) now in use, and discuss modifications (to be reviewed inside 6 months). PASA veterinary advisory board/ current PASA vets/ external expertise, (e.g. Marc Ancranaz, Dominic Travis (Steve Unwin to coordinate)) to review ‘diseases of concern’, testing protocols etc. outlined from 2006 vet healthcare workshop to get PASA wide agreement and to institute a peer review assessment of the protocols.

Ultimately all documents will be posted to the PASA website by webmaster. 3. There is a need for effective relationships with diagnostic laboratories. Regarding local laboratories there is a need to establish capability/availability and protocols. Solution Establish well functioning working relationships with local/regional/international diagnostic laboratories. Sanctuary managers need to feed back on their current associations/attempts to access local laboratories to determine quality and range of diagnostic tests. This information from each sanctuary should be compiled and distributed (Steve Unwin is point person).

Solution Establish a blanket PASA/CITES biological sample export permit from all participating countries.

Action PASA representative to speak to CITES continent wide to determine if such a blanket permit is possible. Chris Wolf to coordinate efforts.

31

G. Transport and Release Implementation Not addressed due to time restrictions. H. Post Release Monitoring High Priority issues: 1. There is a need to establish or elaborate on existing post release monitoring protocols and duration. Solution a) Targets include behaviour (foraging, ranging, nesting, health, social interactions, contacts

with humans, contacts with wild chimpanzees) and habitat resources (e.g., seasonality, phenology, habitat threats)

b) Identify appropriate field techniques (e.g., direct observation, nest to nest follows, indirect techniques such as nest censuses, feces and urine, telemetry, collection of food samples).

c) Standardize data collection to conform to behavioural measures used for wild con-specifics (see Kay Farmer’s PhD work). Data collection protocols should be developed in collaboration with wild chimpanzee specialists

d) A strong field team needs to be developed and trained in data collection techniques. Suggest sending field teams for training at wild chimpanzee research sites

e) Develop protocols in relation to predefined measures of success (e.g., survival, progressing competencies, reproduction)

f) Data should be analysed and interpreted regularly (e.g., quarterly), and monitoring procedures adjusted accordingly

Action Kay Farmer is contact. She can come up with a template. Do not go below what HELP Congo did.

Training: if there is a team working with wild chimpanzees in country, they may enter into a partnership to train sanctuary workers I. Miscellaneous 1. There is a need to consider continued housing and welfare of chimpanzees that are unsuitable for release. Solutions and actions not identified due to time restrictions.

32

GORILLA WORKING GROUP Participants: Christelle Chamberlan, Amos Courage, Kay Farmer, Heather Hoecherl, Mike Jordan, Tony King, Bjarne Klausen, Neil Maddison (facilitator), Liz Pearson, Ian Redmond, Frank Rietkerk, Norm Rosen, Ania Sharwood Smith, Tara Stoinski, Dominic Travis, Chris Whittier Initial Observations PPG release projects are very different from Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project (MGVP) release project as they are dealing with different issues. PPG are releasing groups, MGVP wants to release a single animal into an existing wild gorilla group Planning for Release It is critical to understand and define the rationale for the proposed release up front and to define measures of success. It is also important to recognize that there are differences of opinion. What is Reintroduction/Release? This is a big issue for PPG Congo. Intent is to form a viable population. Is 18 enough? It is not an inbred population. Is 20 total enough in this circumstance? Need expert advice on what is going to be a self-sustaining viable population. What is the reason/rationale for reintroduction?

• Conservation of species • Restoring ecosystems • Welfare • Reintroduction vs. supplementation – single to group, group to group, creating new

group There is a difference of opinion between ape biologists (release projects constitute a potential threat to wild populations and are taking up conservation dollars) and sanctuaries. Many of current release projects would not fall under the recommendations in the IUCN RSG Guidelines. How do you determine success of reintroduction? Habitat & Release Site Will released group overlap with wild populations? This may be an issue with the eastern lowland gorilla for MGVP, not an issue for PPGs. In Cameroon they don’t know where the wild gorillas are, need to do a census, and therefore need to take into consideration overlap with wild population. Is it good or bad in terms of the definition of your project? Is the area actually protected on the ground? What makes a suitable site, including determining carrying capacity? Identify all the various conservation benefits, e.g., Will the forest site contribute to the conservation of high quality forest in the area? (conservation value/ecosystem services). Identify all potential conservation benefits, including flagship species and ecological benefits of having gorillas in the forest, restoring the original ecosystem and ecosystem benefits and values. Forest has a value in place due to ecosystem services or carbon credits. Communicate all of these benefits more clearly to the wider community.

33

There are some issues in introducing certain individuals, such as solitary males, but don’t fully understand potential differences between species of gorillas, i.e. mountain gorilla, eastern lowland, western. Need to determine most appropriate group structure, such as ages and number of males and females in a group. Species Socioecology and Behavior How to manage solitary males (captive situation issue), large range of solo males, how to manage carrying capacity of the forest De-habituation issues: ex-captive (rehabilitated) gorillas are more dangerous to humans; is full rehabilitation possible (de-habituated)? The reintroduced gorillas are not distinguishing between humans and gorillas, treat both like gorillas Are there differences between different species of gorillas and interaction/contact with humans? If so, there is a need for different reintroduction strategies. Group structure Socioeconomic, Financial and Legal Requirements Sustainable funding sources, amount per animal and length of time needed must be determined Differences in values/approach of various stakeholders; government/local people/sanctuaries. Managing expectations of all different stakeholders. Knowledge capacity, differences in values related to the gorillas. Government Issues. Ownership of the released animals/working with government/helping government to implement their policies? Passive vs. active government role – active will be too much involvement How does tourism fit into reintroduction, or does it at all? International and national agreements/policies. Should NGO activities be geared toward assisting government to implement their policies? How can they do so? If there is a written policy at government level, or government has signed onto an international agreement or policy statement, then it may be easier to go forward with release projects if they can fit it into the goals of that written policy. Tourism benefits/threats: the larger problem is whether tourism is even feasible in the area, it generates large amount of income for the country, but is it a realistic/feasible expectation in all places? Is it even possible? The more specific problem is that it causes conflict between the goal of trying to de-habituate gorillas but needing/creating habituation for tourism. Socioeconomic benefits such as jobs. But these benefits will never be enough for the local population. Community education/awareness/engagement with local community regarding importance of gorillas and addressing any perceived dangers and risks of having gorillas nearby, and having realistic expectations. Also, we would like to develop community cooperation and support in the project.

34

Release Stock/Genetic Assessment Need to determine what is the appropriate makeup of a group to go back into the wild, e.g. age, sex structure, size of group. Genetic viability of group. Is there a minimum number or viable number? What information is needed to make these estimates from a genetic standpoint? Founder stock/taxonomy of individuals

• PPG Congo needs help to determine the genetic variability of its founder group and then use that information to try to determine the number necessary for a viable, sustainable long-term population. Potential issue of western versus eastern lowlands if some of them are confiscated coming through Kinshasa.

• [Part of solution is to keep studbook going forward.] Disease Transmission and Veterinary Requirements Health Issues

• Length of quarantine • Do you vaccinate?/vaccination protocols • Psychological behaviour assessment prior to release • Impacts to reintroduced animals themselves - Health of environment being

introduced into, such as livestock, existing wild populations, human populations in the area

Need to try to address misconceptions or perceived threats by larger scientific community. Need to ensure there will not be a large risk (risk assessment), given that it is not possible to test for everything. If there is not really a threat, determined by testing, then need to affirm this with data for the scientific community. Transport and Release Implementation Type of release, hard or soft release. Issues include transport, anaesthesia, groups versus a couple of individuals, same handlers staying with gorillas for length of time. Also includes post-release level of support to reintroduced animals, length of time, provisioning until gorillas ready to leave you or do you impose the decision on them, veterinary intervention Differences in two PPG sites: In Gabon, no need for transport; in Congo, do need to cage them and transport to new site and perhaps need more support.

• PPG Gabon release site is the same as where they do rehabilitation, young ones are caged at night and provisioned with milk and gradually get independent and go to wild.

• In Gabon, they do not call the gorillas to track them and gorillas in Gabon are younger than those in Congo project.

• PPG Congo sites are different because the gorillas are rehabilitated in one place and

then have to be caged and moved to a new location. PPG Congo calls the independent gorillas to come back to them so they can see them as method of

35

monitoring (do not go into forest because it is dangerous). Older gorillas were released in Congo and in a group.

Post-Release Monitoring Human-gorilla conflict issue, both with local people and interaction during time in sanctuary (rehabilitation), crop raiding, disease transmission. Humans cannot go into forest with the gorillas, can’t follow them because they are aggressive to followers (i.e. post-release monitoring is different issue than that for chimpanzees and chimpanzee releases in that way.) Need to determine best methodology to monitor or otherwise measure the long-term survival of the group.

Plan for long-term management, back up plan if it does not work:

• Long-term management may include early levels of support. Need acute veterinary management in the beginning, but may wean off that support later on; may also need provisioning if using soft release, length of time determined by individual animals. Longer term management encompasses managing the gorillas 50 years into the future, including safety, protection. Is an exit strategy necessary?

• When do you determine that it has become a self-sustaining viable population, thus essentially a wild population no longer in need of long-term management?

Discussion of Priorities Planning for Reintroduction

• Agree on definition of reintroduction. Reintroduction refers specifically to IUCN/RSG protocol, for conservation of the species.

• Other values are achieved by the reintroductions taking place now that are not part of species conservation, e.g. forest protection, protection of other species, re-establishment of ecosystem functional values, keystone species, etc. (i.e. other conservation values are worthwhile also, such as other species dependent on the gorillas)

• Define needs of reintroduction versus supplementation • Welfare • One value of these projects is to try to answer some of the questions – knowledge

acquisition – positive contributions to conservation of the entire species since the questions have not been answered before

• If going to species conservation, there is a limited carrying capacity, can’t take all males or all orphans

• Need to be careful not to cause a problem for someone else MGVP Rationale – mountain gorilla (single female) is being placed back into her natal group. This is not a reintroduction, just putting her back where she was taken from. Rationale for PPG projects

• protecting these areas, protecting wild populations, inserting gorillas back into wild in area where they won’t impact other gorillas and don’t have to live in sanctuaries. Keep feeding them in over time as they come to sanctuaries, if they become viable, OK, if don’t then manage to extinction, and will not have any in sanctuaries.

36

Habitat & Site Selection • solitary males – lone males have no fear of humans and have large range • proper size of release site to hold a viable population of gorillas, for gorillas

geographical barriers are more important in terms of determining size of area and how large the carrying capacity can be within that area. Secondary question is whether that population will be viable?

• How can you sell it to the government, i.e. how does protecting a location/site meet other expectations/requirements of the government, e.g. CBD, other ecosystem values, carbon credits

• Hard to know how many gorillas are in any given area, so hard to determine whether there will be any overlap.

• For PPG Congo, it was close to Brazzaville and also isolated. PPG did ground surveys, worked closely with Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and Global Environment Facility (GEF) – large conservation groups). Were able to have a successful collaboration with the goals these larger organizations were trying to achieve. o Gorilla specific requirement needs to be adequate natural boundaries. Large enough

rivers (tree cannot fall over to opposite bank assuming trees can fall from both sides), no escarpments. Humans cannot be using the forest area (ape/human conflict).

• Find site optimally ten years before actual reintroduction for megafauna. o Rivers cannot also be barriers to diversity because cannot mix with existing wild

populations at some stage of the project. Discussion of Potential Solutions Habitat and Release site Problem Statement What is necessary to identify an appropriate release site for gorillas and how long is needed. Discussion Stable funding allows PPG to be more free, others need to answer question of rationale: Is it actual improvement or welfare? If so, constraints can be caused by it being a welfare project Action CWAF start site searching if takes 10 years. Discussion/problems Are there habitats/protected areas where a viable population could be achieved? Could WCS or WWF start keeping an eye out for potential release sites? A PHVA for gorillas in Cameroon could possibly be done by CBSG (country-wide analysis). What is GRASP saying about reintroduction? Transparency important Kinshasa declaration. Are national policies going to be replaced by international ones? Action Look at/be aware of international statements, as well as national development and land use plans. Discussion/problems Identify how much space you need for your objectives

37

Capacity of the site and number of individuals it will hold, food plants still there, will they have what they need? Need to do basic survey, need to know what is there to support those animals, flora and fauna survey, also not to impact other species there, especially if those species are endangered or threatened and addition of gorillas would wipe them out. Could hire a primatologist to give an idea of density/carrying capacity/keystone fruits - PPG used a botanist to do general surveys, identified keystone foods. Hard to know carrying capacity if don’t know amount of the main food gorillas eat a year, so PPG did the carrying capacity analysis in a rough sense – if it would support large population, then that may be good enough Action Develop common methodology for site surveys and share with sanctuaries. Post-release monitoring Problem Statement There is difficulty in tracking gorillas after release due to fact that they cannot be followed into the forest. Discussion PPG would like radio tracking for gorillas, but may not be physically possible. E.g., tried a bracelet on wrist, female had it off before she awoke from anaesthesia. Gorillas don’t like to have anything on them, won’t like any kind of collars. Collars cause stress to gorillas who are already very sensitive, and they can get them off easily. No one has succeeded to date. Because you cannot track them with traditional methods there is a clear need. Implants may be a possibility, however they can be dangerous due to secondary infection, and again, gorillas are very sensitive. Need more information - do batteries need to be changed? Any other problems? How much time do gorillas spend in water? Would the technology work when the gorillas are in marsh/water environments? Big concern re post release monitoring, scary if it is not possible to track the gorillas in terms of disease issues, Ebola, etc. The group would like to have research done on this issue. Actions

• PASA-level research issue; get university to look at this issue of telemetry with gorillas. Alternatively, Great Ape Trust may be interested in this issue, would they be willing to assist in such a research project.

• Get expert on telemetry to present to sanctuaries, perhaps to invite to IPS conference to give presentation

Discussion/problems Pre-release monitoring will not be useful if you can’t monitor post-release. If take pre-release behavioural data, what do you compare it to? Wild gorillas? Trends? Could attempt behavioural scoring on all individuals beforehand to try to predict who will survive the best, and then reintroduce those – i.e. method to screen individuals for release

38

What data will be useful, how will it be useful? (PPG has taken behavioural data, how they spend their time all day – daily behavioral budget; this may not be that useful for comparison but may be useful to screen release individuals) Physiological response is easier to measure, do stress levels go up or down in the wild Personality profiles are done on animals in zoos, can this be useful for comparison to pre-released chimpanzees. Zoos have done character profiles on males to see if they are suitable for bachelor groups for instance, this may be useful to PPG with its problem of solitary males or sanctuaries dealing with bachelor groups. Could consider using instances of display by males in sanctuary versus when in wild, instances of play behavior Do released gorillas display any behaviour trait that is not normal for gorillas in the wild (e.g. orangutans released spend too much time on the ground). Harder to do with gorillas, no research out there on western gorillas. May be useful to do research with visitors there versus no visitors there – even better to measure cortisol levels in these two scenarios. Would help PPG to answer the tourism question for instance. Actions

• Develop a standard protocol to measure stress via cortisol (Tony has done this with the mountain gorillas in Rwanda and Bwindi – get these protocols).

• Disney Wildlife Fund is planning a workshop on multi-male groups in 2007. Problem Statement Reintroduction programs must plan for and address potential conflict with humans. Telemetry can be useful for mitigation of animal human conflict also. If you can identify locations of the gorillas, you could go out and try to intervene (various ways to do this depending on situation – “bribe” them, scare them, anaesthetize them, divert their path, leave them alone and try to influence the community’s behaviour. PPG has an agreement to be able to release in a certain area, which implies that is has no right to have the gorillas in the village areas, these are unprotected areas. In similar situation, with North American wolves, the government allows them to be shot if they leave the protected area; animals are not considered endangered if they belong to a released population, instead they are considered as “experimental individuals”, which can be killed if the situation demands this. Expansion of territory may become important. If males go into an unprotected area, at some point females might follow. So it may be an option to expand the protected habitat that way. PPG has had villagers injured by the gorillas, who will protect themselves (i.e. harm the gorillas) Does it always have to be a conflict? With mountain gorillas, villagers tend to deal with them, but for Congo, you would have to change the villager’s perceptions so that they are not scared. This may require creation of an education program or a greater level of communication with the villagers regarding the way to deal with gorillas and make them aware that the gorillas aren’t as dangerous as they are perceived to be. PPG had to make sure there were no human user rights to the reintroduction area because the gorillas are habituated (similar to issues considered in carnivore groups, such as tigers) With mountain gorillas, farmers have learned to grow different crops in the fields so that the gorillas are not interested in crop-raiding. This reduces conflict. Also villages are further away, so interactions mostly happen in the fields, so fields act as a bit of a buffer zone. Action Research/identify what kind of buffer zone or physical barrier might work with gorillas (such as faeces and chilli powder for elephants, fences, etc).

39

Problem Statement There is a need to consider and develop long-term management plans for the reintroduced populations. Discussion Should you continue to do veterinary interventions after a certain point? Are they really wild? Medical interventions? When to cease? Ever? Most sanctuaries will intervene even with wild animals if they can, particularly if it was a human induced injury. Intervention is likely to depend on long-term plan; if tourism, may be more likely to intervene in longer term to protect the animals. If not part of long term managed plan and are intended to become fully wild, may not wish to intervene further out. Do you need to cull males if they become dangerous to the reintroduced animals? For instance, if a new male takes over groups and kills infants. Do you intervene in this situation? But then what do you do with those males? There is a need for contingency plans for these types of situations. At PPG-Congo, the females are very important to keep in the program, so they may have to find other solution for males The Aspinall Foundation exit strategy is that they are willing to leave if the future is ensured, perhaps with tourism to pay for the entire project. This is not likely to happen, but they are willing to try this. Otherwise the Aspinall Foundation will have to stay and keep funding the project for the long term. Also, the Foundation is doing many other things for gorillas in Congo, the release project is just one part of a much larger project. Aim is part of entire project so you need to look at the entire project. It is also possible to consider a gradual ramping down of various activities rather than a certain stopping point, or base it on certain stage of population development or generations. Probably switch over to different strategies once your interest on an individual level decreases (over time, death of released individuals) and at that point you may be more interested at a population level rather than an individual level Does this issue mesh with a measure of success – possibly, as it ties into your original objectives. May have a negative reaction to reintroduced groups of small numbers of gorillas as compared to conservation of other, larger wild population. How to address this? Should also have pre-release and post-release data on other animal species in the area, or the protected area, so you can see if the project has any impact on them as well. Could be positive or negative impacts. For instance, does reintroducing gorillas impact the chimpanzees in the area by forcing them out? Or does the fact that you have protected the area cause more chimpanzees to come into the area or allow more to survive? Presence of the project in the area can help protect other primates and other species. Action Need to create a flexible plan before release that takes into account changing - or different long-term goals and different long-term scenarios Action Behavioural and psychological assessments should be done. Release Stock and Genetic Assessment Problem Statement There is a need to ensure that the released gorillas are the appropriate taxon for the release area as well as genetic testing to address population viability given the lower numbers of individuals reintroduced for gorillas.

40

Discussion At PPG, are pretty sure all gorillas came from Congo – get information from hunter or person who got the gorillas from the hunter. About half from the north, half from south in Congo. All gorillas found in Congo are currently same sub-species (for now). Based on this, feel OK about reintroducing the captive gorillas into this environment, but would like to be able to verify this with genetic information. Important to make sure there are no issues with a non-western gorilla (in this case) in the history of any of the gorillas that are reintroduced. Question of whether is it feasible to do so. Action PPG would like assistance in developing a protocol for how much genetic testing of its population would cost, how the data would be taken and analyzed, and how the data would be used so that it can present a proposal to John Aspinall Foundation (JAF). Are there problems with transporting genetic material internationally. Governments can use it to delay projects, tie it up. Could address it at CITES level to get a statement that genetic sampling and testing must happen immediately upon confiscation of an animal. Note, there are existing CITES issues with sending genetic material out of the country. Also need to identify a qualified reliable reference lab and ensure there is a quality assurance plan. Need database to compile the existing data on wild populations to compare the new data to. (How much existing data is needed to compare the new genetic material to?) May be wise to store samples over time if you are doing other work on the animal anyway. PASA has a veterinary policy on taking samples that should be used. Action

• Research project to compile database of wild data • Develop protocols for sampling of genetic material in confiscated animals

Government has intellectual property right to genetic information taken on their animals. It is sometimes hard to get samples or necropsy samples even analyzed due to these intellectual property rights. Governments are tired of losing their information to institutions outside the country. May take money to get the biomaterials out. Action Discussion among PASA managers regarding funding issues and intellectual rights, as well as thoughts on sharing sanctuary data. Population viability; do you need more information to determine relatedness? How many animals are needed to make this determination? Could also do the viability analysis by making an assumption that all 14 are unrelated, and run a model through VORTEX. Can do this right away. Can use whatever you know right now as assumptions (if you know two are related for instance). Make another assumption as closed population, and also if add individual animals over time. What would it take to build a viable population over time. If you get more genetic data on relatedness later, can rerun the model and adjust your management of the program. One study for zoo gorillas said 50-100 individuals would ensure a viable population for at least 100 years.

41

CBSG uses VORTEX model for PHVA (Population Habitat Viability Analysis) and could help with this issue of PVA. Can change many variables – how many males breeding over what time period, adding new individuals at different time spacings, etc. Can run several scenarios. A computer model is useful to identify which individuals should mate. A model also could be useful with later supplementation animals if already released as in PPG. Also can help sanctuary in forming groups and in overall management. Action CBSG will give PPG a data input form before end of the workshop to look at for what is needed. For a PVA (Population Viability Analysis), Lincoln Park Zoo will consider conducting the actual modelling depending on amount of information available. Problem Statement Is there any appropriate use for captive-bred animals? Discussion US Zoos taking position for no use of captive animals as founder stock for reintroductions. Is this the correct policy? There may be a reason if there are not enough wild individuals and need to reinforce genetic variability. But also may be risk to captive animal trying to adjust to the wild. Zoos would rather not, but if there is a large justification for it, may be a reason in a cost-benefit sense. PASA policy – PASA does not want to start shipping animals between African countries, cause political conflicts and also slippery slope to start doing that (moving animals across borders). Have to be careful to not deal in trading of gorillas, bad for the long-term survival of the entire species. May be different situation to ship from American or European zoos. Should at least consider this if absolutely necessary for population viability, can always say no can’t do it in individual situation. One way to address this is a very detailed and transparent feasibility study during stage of looking at all options in the reintroduction proposal. This feasibility study should include an analysis of bringing animals from somewhere else. Must include meaningful cost-benefit analysis of each option. Must be transparent process. Could do a peer-reviewed published study for the reintroduction project in order to have best credibility. International issues of moving mountain gorillas. Difficult to move across the border for even a couple of years with the eastern lowland gorillas. Action PASA manager discussion regarding appropriate use, if any, for captive-bred animals. Possible development of policy. Socioeconomic Benefits, Financial and Legal Requirements Problem Statement There is a huge need for sustainable funding. Discussion Tourism, fundraising, and to be creative in what positive impacts of the project will be in terms of identifying funds. Be careful for potential conflicts with funders funding wild population conservation. Depends on the species present in the area, maybe an endemic species that doesn’t live in any other wild gorilla habitat. Case-dependent. Logical frameworks tool. i.e., relating different activities to fund to overall goals of project.

42

Easier to get funds for some items, e.g., post-release monitoring equipment. Take this into consideration in looking for funding.

43

Problem Statement How to manage project when there are differing Government agendas for the reintroduction? Discussion Use unsuitable animals for tourism portion of project, and not with the reintroduced animals. Separate the two. PPG not sure it can ever be done with the reintroduced population. Need a study to determine this. Tourism causes stress to the animals. Where it has been tried, it has not been successful with lowland gorillas. Name of project can impact what tourists come to see. For example, PPG Congo has a sustainable fishing project, could emphasize this in the name. Important to consider how you name your project, for both tourism and local community. CMS has publication that includes case-study on gorilla tourism. Action Funding request for an analysis of whether tourism will work at PPG, or where it might work. Problem Statement Is there an appropriate role for International/National Agreements. Discussion Use text to help move project approvals. Be careful not to limit your project by trying to make it a national strategy or tie it to a national plan or try to get it in national plan. May be more successful at the local level. Don’t shoot yourself in the foot. Action Make sure you are dealing with all the right individuals: GRASP focal person in government (country coordinator) who should be an important initial contact on this issue; if there is possibility of transfer over border, need to contact CMS contact. Problem Statement There is a need to address needs of local community and to build support for project. Discussion Manage expectations on the project. If you take away some areas for use, have to look at benefits too. For instance, protecting other areas of habitat that they use, show them how the project will help them. Tie it to what you can do to help protect what they value in the area. Beneficial impacts. Improving community health is a good benefit, but need to be careful not to encourage more people to come to the area. Also have to consider natural population growth and immigration impacts. Need a communication strategy/program. Straight out bribery. Or use bribery to get chance to show them other positive impacts. Action

• Try to work with local NGOs, so that socioeconomic benefits don’t come directly from foreigners. Also, sanctuary may not be the best people to manage certain community projects.

• Try to build stronger ties to development NGOs, humanitarian NGOs if they are there. Will be very project specific.

44

Health Issues Defer to work of veterinary group of PASA. Species socioecology & behaviour Problem Statement Sanctuaries are in difficult position in Africa to obtain all the information available on their gorilla subspecies to assist in planning for reintroduction. Sanctuary doing project should get everything they can about the species they are reintroducing. Hire a primatologist or have literature search done. Use masters student to distill the information for you? Species-specific summary focused on reintroduction as far as background information. Use advisory board if you have one. Need to find a way to best use information out there. Any information out there on western gorillas should share it with each other, internet bulletin board or something similar. Also, if someone summarizes the studies/literature, that should be shared. Action Role for PASA to keep a database of literature and summaries. Researchers are generally more likely to have this kind of thing. Perhaps a PASA volunteer to pull together a bibliography of published information for the various species and keep it updated every year. Problem Statement Lessons learned in other sanctuary release programs is not widely available in written form and lack of mechanism to share this type of information. Discussion What to do to communicate lessons learned. Don’t have time to publish. Also potential problems with publishing failures and failed decision-making for future of project in a country. How to address this? Action

• PASA database of lessons learned in various reintroductions. What to do about sensitive information.

• PASA could find volunteer hire to visit all of the sanctuaries and conduct interviews of all the sanctuaries and download all the information and write it up. Possibly also include other non-PASA reintroductions of primates in Africa that no one has the information on.

45

DRILLS AND OTHER MONKEYS WORKING GROUP Participants: Chris Odu Agbor, Ben Beck, Barb Cartwright (facilitator), Doug Cress, Liza Gadsby, Mike Jordan (presenter), David Lucas, Rita Miljo, Zena Tooze List of Issues Identified

• Telemetry & monitoring • Wild status (monkeys already at release site) • Accordance with other so-called stakeholders / interested parties at release sites • Facilitating & collaborating with other researchers to get data published in timely

fashion • Choosing individuals for release • Prioritizing which data to collect for proper evaluation & monitoring • Political problems / permit problems for wild existence of monkeys • Clarification of goals / justify reintroduction • Lack of information on species and sociology • Genetic assessment • Veterinary concerns / testing requirements • Taxonomy • Equality among primate taxa / standards • Should we be applying to all primates same reintroduction standards • Funding • How much funding do you need to start? • Post-release follow up / data collection / data storage • Intervention policies / when to intervene / obligations for intervention • Whether to intervene • Social intervention & health intervention • Human & animal conflict • Tourism • When is tourism justified / conflict of interest • Knowledge of species & species existence • National regulations / policies • International guidelines pro /con • Welfare issues / compassionate release • Protection of release site • National recognition / government support • Developing relationship with government / successional strategy • Blending reintroduction with existing policies • Having enough animals for release / reintroduction (how many is enough)

Planning for Release Clarification of goals purposes & priorities & goals Species Socio-ecology & Behavior

• Lack of information

46

Socioeconomic financial & legal

• Government • Accordance with other stakeholders • Public awareness • Land tenure / access • Funding • Human & animal conflict • Protection of release site • Government & community relations • Livelihood for host communities • Opposition

Release Stock

• Choosing individuals for release • Genetic assessment • Number of animals for release • Funding

Genetic Assessment

• Genetic status of release animals • Funding

Disease Transmission & Veterinary Requirements

• Genetic assessment • Veterinary concerns • Intervention policy / health-related • Data sample banking • Funding • Sample banking • CITES export permits for diagnostic

Transportation & Release Implementation

• Funding • Provisioning

Post-Release Monitoring

• Telemetry • Monitoring • Data collection (information) • Long-term security • Facilitating & collaborating with others • Human / wildlife conflict resolution • Intervention

Habitat & release site • Protection of release site • Funding

47

Priorities Clarification of goals / purpose / priorities Each release project needs a clear statement of purpose, thereby improving the ability to address, justify and formulate many other aspects and achieve expected results. Solutions

• Outside advisors to review the Release Project Plan to offer clarity • Compassionate / resonate with PASA goals (accessible, impartial, thick-skinned) • Iterative process needs to be pursued to make goals explicit • Reintroduction workshop(s) • Organizational site visit by expert team • Suggested structure – one day tacked onto workshops – for two years while we

fundraise for expert team to conduct site visits. • Experts help to tighten up proposals – seeding money for front end planning/proposal

writing/ project development (e.g. – World Conservation Union (IUCN), Association of Zoos and Aquaria (AZA), Disney, Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Conservation International (CI)

• Possibility of National governments supporting site visits from expert team – must have clear public benefit. Make it a match – common goals. Must address bigger picture issues – ecosystem services, human benefit.

• PASA scientific advisory board – service orientated, accessible. Reps must be willing and able to support own activities.

• Expert team members, supported by the organizations in which they sit, to contribute in this capacity.

• Fit to purpose teams built to address specific project issues • Release proposals/plans circulated to experts for comment prior to site visits. TORs for

experts. Panel to recommend appropriate site team. • Strategic planning process

Actions

1. Outside advisor to assist with an articulation process (Ben Beck) 2. Scientific advisory board (overall PASA) 3. Re-introduction expert team areas (action review team – see end)

Managers have access to this team throughout the project development phase a. Determine range of expertise needed b. Identify people c. Determine the TORs d. Protocols and process Need a PASA project point person to get these four actions rolling (immediate need – Norm Rosen to assist) Peer Review process established (manager – PASA secretariat – Advisors – comments to Chair – manager)

48

Post-release monitoring (telemetry / data collection) Reintroduction projects currently lack efficient and effective methods and technology including telemetry, to collect post-release data on animal identification, location and mortality. The projects require an expert, non-competitive and accessible source to provide solutions. Solutions

• Remote sampling expertise – abundance, distribution etc. • GIS specialist • Access to RSG network for advice on monitoring technologies/methodologies. • Site visit team • List of companies and contacts developing this technology • Compile a list of current options, and the strengths and weaknesses of their application • List - who has used what technology, and with what species • Determine resources available – biodiversity monitoring etc. • Websites - Wildlife materials / Telonics (ape experience) / BioTrack Resources /

Environmental Studies • Generate a list of people who have used telemetry on primates

Actions 1. Expert team 2. List of companies (Fred Launay/David Lucas to collate and distribute - Immediately) 3. Journal List (Ben Beck to put together – short bibliography of census techniques for

abundance and distribution of animals – end May, send on to Doug Cress) 4. Paper (Dominic Travis to talk to JM? next month)

(Two parts – Government & Community) 1. Participatory government / community approach (Issue statement – no action items) How to determine the level of community involvement, including information, education, consultation or equal partnership, recognizing that sanctuaries may be limited in their ability to engage as full partners with the local communities. 2. Government relations Reintroduction projects require long-term, reliable government approval and participation. Solutions

• MoU developed with government and community • Stakeholder analysis/socio-economic survey done upfront – done to determine level of

community involvement at the beginning • Government employees embedded in the project • National counterpart should be required/provided for in project – included in initial project

planning • Be engaged with multiple levels of government, local tribal/clan leaders

49

• Clearly identified long-term goal to inform succession planning, and therefore national staffing/capacity building needs etc.

• Government relations plan developed • Communication plan developed • Education plan (Making explicit what it done intuitively) • Employee health program – monitoring local community health issues – participations in

vaccination programs • Strategic interventions, rapid responses to perceived health, and other, issues coming

from re-introduction – human/wildlife conflict, crop raiding, fires etc. Team made up of Local govt, community and project reps. – Part of MoU, shared responsibility.

• Determine local health issues from local health authorities etc. Actions

• Project proponents begin drafting MoUs • Incorporate tools into decision-making process (Dominic Travis, May 2006) • For all diseases listed – should be a fact sheet concerning individual diseases and who

is at risk (humans, livestock etc.) (who? when?) • Produce a binder incorporating reintroduction resources, MoU template etc. (who?

when?) • Checklist developed? (Dominic Travis?) • Development of a ‘how to’ and resources to guide projects through the process of

developing a communications plan

Funding Reintroduction projects require a financial needs & risk analysis to proceed. Wild status at release site Reintroduction projects lack accurate up-to-date data regarding species populations at release sites. Protection of release site Reintroduction projects need to determine and implement the approach to protect release sites from logging, encroachment, hunting and other threats. Accordance with other stakeholders Reintroduction projects need to create greater awareness of projects to improve communication and security with other organizations to minimize conflict. Veterinary concerns Reintroduction projects seek to improve veterinary compliance in order to meet scientific protocols.

50

Genetic assessment Reintroduction projects need to know if the IUCN requirements for genetic screening are necessary in all cases as a prerequisite to re-introduction, and if so how to evaluate. Proposed Expert Team Areas (scientific advisory board, and/or site visit team) 1. Strategic Planner 2. Monitoring/tracking/census 3. IUCN re-introduction specialist 4. GIS specialist 5. Vet 6. MD (could be local) 7. Community participation specialist 8. Ecologist 9. Population ecologist 10. Primate behavioral specialist (pre-release management of animals, release stock selection) 11. Fundraising specialist

51

52

African Primate Reintroduction Workshop Apeldoorn, The Netherlands

20-22 April 2006

 

Section 4

Appendices

53

54

Participants List Chris Odu Agbor Cross River State Forestry Commission Nigeria Marc Ancrenaz PASA / Hutan Malaysia Hutan1@tm.net.my Claudine Andre Lola ya Bonobo Democratic Republic of Congo lolayabonobo@ic.cd Benjamin Beck Great Ape Trust USA bbeck@greatapetrust.org Wayne Boardman London Zoo United Kingdom wayne.boardman@zsl.org Onnie Byers CBSG USA onnie@cbsg.org Frands Carlsen Copenhagen Zoo/CBSG Denmark fc@zoo.dk Bryan Carroll Bristol Zoo United Kingdom bcarroll@bristolzoo.org.uk Barb Cartwright IFAW-Canada Canada bcartwright@ifaw.org, barbcartwright@sympatico.ca Christelle Chamberlan PPG-Congo Republic of the Congo ppg_congo@hotmail.com Raffaella Commitante PASA USA rcommitante@gmail.com

Amos Courage Howletts/John Aspenall United Kingdom amosc@howletts.net Debby Cox JGI / PASA Uganda debby@jgiuganda.org Doug Cress PASA USA PASAapes@aol.com Bert de Boer Appenheul The Netherlands l.deboer@apenheul.nl Joanne Earnhardt Lincoln Park Zoo USA JEarnhardt@lpzoo.org Kay Farmer PASA Liberia kayhfarmer@yahoo.co.uk Liza Gadsby Drill Ranch Nigeria drill@hyperia.com Rosa Garriga Tacugama Sierra Leone rosagarriga@yahoo.com Benoit Goossens Evolution et Diversité Biologique, Université Paul Sabatier, Wales goossensbr@cardiff.ac.uk Heather Hoecherl PASA USA baharivision@yahoo.com Aliette Jamart HELP Congo Republic of the Congo Help.congo@cg.celtelplus.com

Mike Jordan Chester Zoo United Kingdom m.jordan@chesterzoo.org Tony King PPG-Congo Republic of the Congo ppg@uuplus.com Bjarne Klausen EAZA/Odense Zoo Denmark b.klausen@odensezoo.dk Felix Lankester Limbe Cameroon info@limbewildlife.org Fred Launay RSG United Arab Emirates flaunay@erwda.gov.ae David Lucas PASA Australia dclvisions@hotmail.com Neil Maddison Bristol Zoo United Kingdom nmaddison@bristolzoo.org.uk Rita Miljo CARE South Africa care@lantic.net Liz Pearson PPG-Gabon Gabon mpassa@uuplus.com Estelle Raballand Chimpanzee Conservation Center Guinea esthel@yahoo.com Ian Redmond Born Free Foundation United Kingdom ele@globalnet.org

55

Frank Rietkerk Appenheul The Netherlands nvdzoos@nvdzoos.nl Norm Rosen PASA/CBSG USA normrosen@aol.com Anne Russon York University Canada ARusson@gl.yorku.ca Ania Sharwood Smith AAP The Netherlands Ania.Sharwood@AAP.NL Tara Stoinski Zoo Atlanta USA tstoinski@zooatlanta.org Richard Sussna Chimpanzee Sanctuary & Wildlife Conservation Trust Uganda rssuna@ngambaisland.org Zena Tooze CERCOPAN Nigeria cercopan@compuserve.com Dominic Travis Lincoln Park Zoo USA dtravis@lpzoo.org Caroline Tutin HELP Congo USA caroline.tutin@wanadoo.fr Steve Unwin Chester Zoo United Kingdom s.unwin@chesterzoo.org Chris Whittier Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project Rwanda chris_whittier@hotmail.com

56

Participant Introductions 1. What do you want to accomplish during these three days? Learn other projects experiences/thoughts, ideas and plans for reintroduction. Why? Realistic/practical? Unified PSAS response/strategy; Refinement of guidelines based on field experiences. Deeper insight into reintroduction efforts in Africa; get to know PASA better. A clear understanding of the way forward for primate release projects, be they reintroductions, rehabilitations, or supplementation. A clear understanding among workshop participants about what exactly they hope to accomplish with reintroductions; a precise use of terminology related to this topic we are discussing; a balanced understanding of the conservation/welfare aspects of the proposed reintroduction actions; a win/win situation in adhering to RSG guidelines and solving issues of sanctuaries regarding capacity problems. Find support, advice, and help for the CCC release program; get advice on how we can prepare the chimps for release. Discuss and arrive at a consensus on all the important factors to consider in the reintroduction of specific primates which hopefully should be adapted by IUCN. Find support and advice for my reintroduction project in the bonobo habitat. Practical solutions to reintroduction problems (telemetry) Review the health procedures and disease risk assessment processes for the reintroductions of primates and find practical solutions; contribute to the overall reintroduction process. Formalise veterinary guidelines and protocols for reintroduction from PASA sanctuaries. Integration into overall reintroduction strategies. To agree of ways forward for reintroduction: in the field, in the wider community (local and national) and in the international arena. Opportunities to highlight/grab attention to help address the underlying problem of ape loss (answer the questions: “why reintroduce?”) Reflect on and clarify the roles sanctuaries do and can play within broad conservation strategies. Uniform strategy protocols and guidelines for PASA sanctuaries in the field of release/reintroduction and translocations of primates in Africa; how do we get to a point of not needing sanctuaries or reintroductions programs. Help to facilitate in any way I can.

57

2. What do you hope to contribute? PPG Gabon’s experiences ’on the ground’ Reality of implementing reintroduction programme in the filed vs. romantic notion i.e., “free willy”! Share knowledge with you all and help to bring EU zoo view to PASA reintroduction. A very broad base of experience across many hundred reintroduction/rehabilitation projects from plants to primates. Assisting group in clarifying the needs and how best to combine these with RSG guidelines during 3 days hard work; good discussions on strengthening links between EAZA Zoos and sanctuaries. My experience so far and a new methodology for release of chimps.; Contribute to the veterinary considerations in re-introductions. My experience with the bonobo’s behavior; my experience in DRC for 55 years for administrative questions with local authorities and communities. Practical reintroduction experience with gorillas. My experience and knowledge in health and disease issues in African primates to the overall reintroduction planning process and knowledge of involvement in many other reintroduction programmes in NZ/Australasia. Current disease risk assessment and biosecurity information from the majority of PASA sanctuaries. Lessons carried out on local community work – poor people living in and around a protected areas where there is a demand for illegal commonly obtained bushmeat. Reality checks based on long experience… 12 years of experience of working in the African environment plus the commitment that whatever is decided or agreed upon to make these recommendations into actions. Potential problems (troubleshooting) that can be avoided in primate reintroductions and looking at results long term and long (wide) range.

58

Presentations As an introduction to the working group section of the workshop, day one was reserved for presentations by experts on different issues and dilemmas facing primate reintroduction programmes as well as the release plans and experiences of the sanctuaries present at the workshop. The Presentations are compiled in appendices 7.1 and 7.2 and include: Issue Presentations

• IUCN Guidelines and Ape Reintroductions: Ben Beck • Disease Issues: Dominic Travis • Issues related to community acceptance of reintroduction projects: Barb Cartwright • Training animals prior to reintroduction: Anne Russon • Site selection issues: David Lucas • Creating government support: Chris Agbor

Sanctuary Presentations

• Tacugama, Sierra Leone: Rosa Garriga • Lola ya Bonobo; DRC: Claudine Andre • PPG - Congo: Tony King • Drill Ranch, Nigeria: Liza Gadsby • CCC, Guinea: Estelle Raballand • Cercopan, Nigeria: Zena Tooze • LWC (+ other in-country sanctuaries), Cameroon: Felix Lankester • Eastern Gorilla Rehabilitation and Reintroduction Project: Chris Whittier